Tag Archives: terrorism.

Post navigation

Re-Posted Mar 17, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

Several women have written in and disagree with what I wrote about prostitution. They argue that 75% of prostitutes come from broken homes, which today is over 50% of marriages. They also state that these girls were abused as children in every way possible and many are runaways. Some also argue that these girls turn to prostitution because they are addicted to drugs and became pregnant at very young ages in their teens and have to support a child on their own.

All of that said, I agree that there are girls that fall into each of those categories. However, There are strikingly different cultures and different solutions around the world that warrant looking at both in Asia and Europe. In Thailand, they have a different culture and sex is not looked down upon as it is in the West. The girls are not drugged out or abducted. They are there to make money typically to support their families, which include their parents. Many also do dream of meeting the right guy in the process. In fact. studies show that 15% of the women in the Thailand sex trade marry their customers when they are foreign men (see a study published by Khon Kaen University).

Amsterdam is also strikingly different. The girls are not drugged out and they fall more into the professional category and some may cling to that dream of meeting Mr. right while others have probably given up on the dream of love at first sight and the knight in shining armor will come to carry them away. Both Thailand and Amsterdam show that even prostitutes do find love, which was the story-line of Pretty Woman.

Similarly, in Japan, there are a few private clubs where the girls are virgins and if you wish to select one, and she agrees, you paid $250,000+ and she was yours. You then had to provide her an apartment in Tokyo and support her as a concubine. She would be there for you whenever you were in Tokyo. They did this to be taken care of and a portion of the money always went back to her family. There are different cultures around the world and different morals.

I know in East Europe, men were going there and pretending to want to marry. They entered into the arranged marriage and took the girl and then promptly sold her into sex slavery. That was common when the Wall Fell in 1989, and parents are wise to that scam these days. There is just a stark difference between what we see in Thailand and Amsterdam compared to where prostitution is illegal. My point is that if there is a legal industry then the girls are protected and this would tend to reduce the abductions.

I have written before when I was in New York standing on the corner in front of the Plaza hotel during the day, this girl came up to me dressed in genes. She asked if there was anything she could do for me. That is using the words spoken by a hooker, but she looked like 13 to me. I was confused and said no, and she asked again. I was not sure and was giving her the benefit of the doubt because she looked so young. I thought perhaps she wanted money for food or something. Then the doorman came over and told her to get out and she turned and cursed him. I then asked was she a hooker? He said yes she bothered the guests routinely. She was probably a runaway working for someone I suppose.

I knew a girl who worked for me once who was raped by her step-father between 7 and 10. She ran away to an aunt in another State. She was strong enough to tell me the story when she was 25. She did not become a prostitute. I respected her strength and she put her life together.

You can pass all the laws you want. It will not stop the abuse. Amsterdam, Japan, and Thailand are a different issue and there are girls who do hope to meet that special someone.

Outlaw booze and you created the Mafia.

Outlaw prostitution and you create abduction.

There has to be a better way. Girls are abducted and sold into sex slavery only because it is profitable. Remove the profit with legal competition, and you just may end the abductions. Promote safe-houses for runaways and you may save a life.

It is going to take a heck of a lot of deep-weed education to cut through the economic gaslighting of the multinational corporations, Wall Street and their purchased institutional media. However, I give the White House team (Secretary Ross, Secretary Mnuchin, Ambassador Lighthizer and Adviser Peter Navarro) a measure of strong credit for beginning:

WHITE HOUSE: Measurement of trade flows is usually an uncontroversial topic relegated to macroeconomic classrooms and government technocrats. Recent debates about trade policy have brought the topic out of the shadows, and we hope to clarify how economists measure trade.

Every day there are international transactions for tens of thousands of different products. Physical goods, interchangeably called merchandise, are what usually comes to mind first. However, an increasing share of international trade is in services that are not physically transported between countries—think about financial insurance, licensing of trademarks, or services like consulting.

To make the world a bit more complicated, goods and services are increasingly bundled together, such as when a manufacturer sells a piece of machinery along with an international maintenance contract. The machinery is a good, but the maintenance agreement is a service.

From a macroeconomic perspective, economists typically use the balance of payments (BOP) basis. The BOP captures flows of what we would normally think of as imports and exports of goods, but also includes a series of adjustments. This process better aligns trade data with national income accounts such as GDP. The BOP has the added advantage of being applicable to service transactions as well.

The International Monetary Fund defines BOP as “a statistical statement that systematically summarizes, for a specific time period, the economic transactions of an economy with the rest of the world.” BOP transactions are valued using BPM6 methodology that emphasizes using balance sheet analysis to understand international economic developments and to improve comparability with other countries.

In order to construct the BOP, start with the customs value of imports and exports. A frequently used U.S. government data source reports monthly “customs basis” for transactions. There are different methods of customs valuation.

The transaction value method is the price actually paid by the buyer for the imported goods and includes all payments made as a condition of sale. But the transaction may or may not occur at the border—some international shipments change ownership when loaded, others when unloaded, some even at a specified point in transit.

Recognizing this array of contracts, alternative methods that evaluate imports based on identical or similar goods, deductive value, or computed value are used in various situations. Government statistics are specific about where the customs value is reported, with common specifications including “free on board” (f.o.b.), “free alongside ship” (f.a.s.), or “customs, insurance, and freight” (c.i.f) to designate how much of shipping costs are included in the transaction value.

Starting from the customs value, a series of adjustments are made to arrive at BOP. These adjustments are typically fairly small, but they can be significant in aggregate. The current U.S. adjustments are:

In 2017, the aggregate difference between customs goods imports and BOP goods imports was $19.0 billion on a customs basis of $2.34 trillion. For goods exports, the correction was similar—a difference of $4.0 billion on a customs basis of $1.55 trillion.

Subtracting imports from exports gives the trade balance. Trade balances can be calculated for goods, for services, for goods and services, for one country, for a group of countries, or for the whole world.

The most inclusive measure of trade covers both goods and services. Some economists worry about the measurement of trade in services, which may be subject to inconsistencies, and so prefer to focus on trade in goods alone. After all, goods are tangible things that are easier to count.

Others prefer to focus on goods alone because on average all goods-producing industries have higher wages than all service-producing industries; in Q3 of 2017 average total compensation per hour worked in goods-producing industries was about 20 percent higher at $39.97 while the same measure for service-producing industries was $32.21.

Although BOP accounting is similar across nations, each country can interpret BOP methods slightly differently, which leads to differences in reported values of surpluses and deficits. These details are typically spelled out in exhaustive detail in government documents that could be prescribed as a cure for insomnia. For an example, see the Bureau of Economic Analysis document here.

To illustrate some of the concepts presented in this post, consider U.S. bilateral trade balances with Canada. In 2017, the U.S. goods and services balance was a surplus of $2.77 billion. The goods alone balance on a BOP basis was a U.S. deficit of $23.16 billion, but on a customs basis it was a deficit of $17.58 billion. Note that the difference between the BOP goods and services balance and the BOP goods alone balance implies a trade surplus in services of $25.93 billion.

In contrast, Canadian statistics report a goods and services trade surplus with the United States of $26.76 billion, using the Canadian BOP methodology. The goods alone balance is $40.50 billion on a BOP basis.

One important difference in BOP methodology between the Canadian and U.S. approaches is the treatment of re-exported goods. USTR raised a related issue, on the role of re-exports in Census-based bilateral trade balances, in its 2018 Annual Report. (link)

Earlier today President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump welcomed Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar to the White House. Part of the festivities included the presentation of a Shamrock Bowl by the Prime Minister to the American people.

Re-Posted Mar 16, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Hi Marty,
we just saw the German elections play out. For Germany, this is a huge move to the left – at least in government. They also say that Europe will be strongly supported. I guess that means shoveling money to Brussels and raising it via more and more taxes. Now, I researched everything you wrote about the ride of the right-wing parties in Europe and the separatist movements. I would be interested in your thought on how this plays out. E.g. Germany with its left-wing government. It rather seems to be the case that government will become more and more left-wing. Just as in the Weimar Republic. So I do not think that a right-wing could have enough political force to take power, also since Antifa is MUCH more violent and also more powerful than the right. Politicians blame the right for many things, violent events etc, while in fact, it is a rather docile movement with very little power and if so, only in the hands of individuals who do hardly organize since it really is the promotion of individualism vs group-think (left) and group movements. So from a logical standpoint, it seems rather likely to have the socialist agenda gain power. I know you say it is coming to an end. I trust you are correct. Socialism does not work and people might notice at some point. But it seems to be in a quite distant future still. Could you elaborate on that? Will Immigration finally win and move Europe and Germany into a new societal form? Finally, the European left-wingers are actually importing authoritarianism. Which very ironic since they probably think they are importing voters.

Thanks, Marty.

Best, SP.

ANSWER: Oh yes. I do not think most people outside of Germany understand that. Merkel lost control. To keep power, she had to create a Grand Coalition with the SPD, which has been the Northern socialists with origins that go back to the Weimer Republic and the Communist Revolution. The SPD took power for both they and the CDU of Merkel realized that going back to the people would result in both parties losing even more ground. This is highlighted particularly after the Italian election. I have NEVER been asked for a meeting by anyone in the SPD. They have always fundamentally been opponents of anything my computer has forecast. They have NEVER been interested in what is economically best for the people – they are only interested in imposing their will upon the people because they do not see the same light they do.

Most people have no idea that Lenin was more of a dreamer who at least thought he was benefiting the people. It was Lenin who warned not to allow Stalin to take power after him. He said:“Comrade Stalin, having become Secretary-General, has unlimited authority concentrated in his hands, and I am not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution.” Stalin did everything he could to take power. This has been the curse of the left. They see themselves in a war against the producers and whatever action they take, it is always for the good of the people. This attitude marks the left who always seek to subjugate the right. They never believe in human rights other than their own and have historically always taken an authoritarian position painting themselves as the victim being exploited by the right. The official state records showed that Stalin killed about 2.9 million people. However, this does not include those who died from famine in places like Ukraine for example, which stand at about 7 to 10 million. In Ukrainian, they coined a term for what Stain did – Holodomor (Голодомо́р) meaning “to kill by starvation” has remained at the core of why Ukrainians want independence from Russia.

Nymphenburg Palace Home of Bavarian Monarchy

When you look around the globe, what you see is a rising intense fight building between the left v right, i.e. Thieves v Producers in terms of Ann Rand. Simultaneously, we are witnessing the rise of separatism. We see this everywhere. We see in Europe Scotland, Catalonia, Bavaria, Sicily and others. Even in Canada, I wrote about the move of Alberta to secede from Canada. British Columbia is left-wing and environmentalists so they are blocking a pipeline from Alberta through their province. What you see is a trade war within Canada between two provinces. In Germany, we see this sentiment starting to rise in Bavaria which has long retained an underlying sense of nationalism ever since Bavaria was incorporated into the state of Germany in 1871. The old Bavarian palace of the Monarch remains a symbol of Bavarian Nationalism. I remember being in Bavaria when they were celebrating winning the war over the Prussians in the north.

The origins of the rise of Bavarian nationalism as a strong political movement emerged from the Austro-Prussian War and its aftermath. Bavaria had always been both politically and culturally closer to Catholic Austria than Protestant Prussia. We see the similar religious strains in Britain as we do in Germany – Protestants in the North v Catholics in the South. Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-five Theses to the church door at Wittenberg. The Bavarians shared with the Austrians a common contempt towards the Prussians, leading Bavaria to ally with Austria in the war.

After World War I, in 1923, Bavarian monarchists of the Bavarian People’s Party attempted to seize control of the Bavarian government and declare Bavaria independent of Germany and the Weimar Republic restoring the Bavarian monarchy wherein 1918 the north wanted a Communist Revolution and even asked Russia to come take Germany. This Bavarian separatist coup attempt was then preempted by the then-small Nazi Party which itself attempted to take over the Bavarian government. Bavarian nationalists and the Nazi Party competed for a support base. Finally, the 1932 election saw the Nazi Party won a major victory nationally, yet the Nazis did not surpass the Catholic Bavarian People’s Party in southern Bavaria. The Nazis won only the Protestant areas of northern Bavaria. The underlying resentment remains deep in the heart of Bavaria.

In 2013, the Bavaria Party still won 2.1% of the total vote in state elections so they have not faded away. Top officials in the Bavarian sister party of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives have warned the center-left Social Democrats (SPD) that failure to stick to agreements on migrants could cause the collapse of the potential new German government. Once more, we still see the tensions between Bavaria v the North. Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) needs the Christian Social Union (CSU) of Bavaria to even rule. The CSU was formerly the most right-wing party in Germany. But its rubber-stamp of Merkel and the open-door policy to refugees cost them dearly. The AfD won 19.17% of the popular vote in the September 24th, 2017 national election. This was the highest level of support in the former West German states.

Here we have a rising new party, Alternative for Deutschland (AfD), which really began in the East and took 12.6% of the national vote. Once again, we see the inner tension between the socialists (SPD) of the North and their quest to forcibly impose their will upon the South. This is the tension of centuries that goes back to the Prussian v Bavaria confrontations that began in religion.

The left will make a major stand to seize control globally. They will be VERY OPPRESSIVE and this is what will end up destroying the West as we see the economic epic center move to Asia with China becoming the dominant financial capital of the world.

World economic growth (GDP) peaked in 1973. We are looking for the final low to form during 2035.8. The next low will be in 2025 and this will be a Cycle Inversion from a high producing a low. However, you can easily see from this chart of world GDP, socialism is dying. The Pension Crisis will be a major event and the failure of that system will spark not just civil unrest, but the left assaulting the right. The left will look to plunder the wealth of the right and justify it in their minds as they are entitled to this because the right got rich by exploiting the left. This may become excessive between 2029 and 2032.

When Rome turned against the producers under Maximinus, this is what really began to destroy the Roman Empire. Informants were rewarded to turn in anyone with assets they believed was hoarding wealth. They turned everyone against everyone else and that broke the bonds of civilization. Even after Maximinus was killed by his own troops and his head was sent to the Roman Senate, capital investment NEVER returned. The producers began to invest less and continued to hoard more. Confidence was simply lost and people did not trust one another anymore.

This is simply how human nature responds given the same set of circumstances. The more the left seeks to raise taxes and punish the producers, the greater the producers will hoard and not invest and we will see a continued decline in economic growth rates. We can see that we really cannot get world GDP above the 3% level. The decline post-2007 has been profound and 10 years of Quantitative Easing has only caused wealth to contract. Negative interest rates sparked more hoarding of cash even among the middle class.

Draghi is holding on for dear life. He has no prayer in hell to restore the economy of Europe. All he has done is kept the governments on life-support. When they cannot sell their bonds, they will raise taxes drastically to try to stay afloat. This is how history repeats. The same circumstances will emerge, but like a Shakespeare play, it can be acted out over the centuries with the only change being the actors.

Rescue efforts are ongoing in Miami as a newly constructed pedestrian bridge has collapsed near the campus of Florida International University (FIU). The bridge was designed as a suspension bridge and the span that collapsed over the street was put into place on Saturday morning. There are numerous casualties and fatalities.

MIAMI – […] The bridge gave way suddenly while the traffic light for motorists on Tamiami Trail was red, so that the concrete span fell on top of a row of stopped vehicles.

[…] The bridge crashed across six lanes of heavily traveled Tamiami Trail, crushing a still undetermined number of cars and killing a still unclear number of people. Police on the scene said at least six people could be dead.The Florida Highway Patrol reported five or six cars were trapped under the bridge. Miami-Dade County police said at least eight cars had been crushed under the walkway, which was not yet open to student traffic.

At least eight people had been transported to the trauma center at Kendall Regional Medical Center, according to a source close to the hospital. The condition of the patients is not yet known.

[…] Miami-Dade County Police Chief Juan Perez said he believed there were multiple people trapped. He wouldn’t venture to guess at the number because first responders were having trouble getting to the vehicles. South Florida’s WSVN reported that television news helicopters were ordered to back off so rescuers could listen for sounds from survivors.

The collapse was clearly a major failure of a project not expected to be completed until early 2019. There was no immediate explanation for what might have triggered the collapse, which occurred shortly before 2 p.m.

[…] Designed as a cable-supported bridge, the $14.2 million bridge project was a collaboration between MCM Construction, a prominent Miami-based contractor, and Figg Bridge Design, based in Tallahassee. Figg is responsible for the iconic Skyway bridge across Tampa Bay.

Figg issued a statement Thursday saying the company was “stunned” by the collapse and promising to cooperate with every authority investigating the collapse.

“In our 40-year history, nothing like this has ever happened before,” the company’s statement said. “Our entire team mourns the loss of life and injuries associated with this devastating tragedy, and our prayers go out to all involved.” (read more with videos)

Terrific ‘big picture’ interview and discussion between National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro and CNBC’s Rick Santelli about President Trump’s trade policies, the threat of China, and the future of how our nation will deal with allies and trading partners.

.

A perpetual trade deficit is detrimental to our American economy because it is financed with debt. We can buy more than we make because we borrow from trading partners. The trade deficit simply means we purchase more foreign goods, and send more money overseas, than they purchase from us. We then turn around and borrow back the money we just paid.

Another broad concern revolves around national security. A perpetual trade deficit is a statement about the competitiveness of the U.S. economy itself. By purchasing manufactured goods overseas for a long enough period of time, U.S. companies lose the expertise and even the factories to make those products; ex: try finding a pair of shoes made in the America. As the United States loses manufacturing competitiveness, we outsource more jobs, and our total standard of living declines.

It’s well known that Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan doesn’t want to be in an actual leadership position; and it’s also well known -enhanced by the campaign, and victory, of Donald Trump- that Republicans did not want to win the majority position and face having to reveal their true UniParty agenda.

The evidence of this UniParty positioning has been staring the electorate in the face, repeatedly and brutally, since candidate Donald Trump actually campaigned on key tenets of the Republican party and found himself being openly opposed by GOP leadership.

Now, there will be some who think this is just a bone-headed move by Paul Ryan because the Democrats already held a +50,000 registration advantage in the district and the SuperPAC didn’t know this mailer would actually end up supporting Lamb. However, as mentioned, there’s a history here that tells us “a mistake” is likely not the case.

The real motive, based on an honest review of history, is the professional UniParty apparatus knew that Democrat Conor Lamb needed a lift to offset the cross party voting that was reflected in the district voting (by over 20 points) for Donald Trump in 2016.

The DC Republican apparatus is quite comfortable losing their majority position so long as they are not forced to support Trump policies which are entirely against their financial interests. [How Mitch McConnell Crushed The Tea-Party]

Even before candidate Trump entered the 2016 presidential race, the agenda was visible for anyone who was willing to admit it. In 2014 the same Republican leadership paid Democrats to vote against the Republican primary winner of the Mississippi Senate race (Cochran -vs- McDaniel) simply because Mitch McConnell didn’t like the idea of having an actual Republican in the seat.

Remember, this is the GOP wing of the UniParty who operate on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce {DEEP DIVE} and support: comprehensive immigration reform to include amnesty; lax border security to allow cheap labor; Omnibus spending as reflected in their Obama budget-fulfillment votes; the retention of ObamaCare as mandated by the U.S. CoC; the expansion of federal common core education standards; the Wall Street trade agenda to include TPP. All of these “DC-Republican” positions are opposed by the current Republican President and the majority of Republican voters.

Enhancing and emphasizing my argument that this mailer as a deliberate effort to elect a Democrat, I would remind everyone of a few brutally obvious points: ♦the Republican controlled senate voted unanimously to block any Trump recess appointments (summer 2017); ♦and also the reality that both the House and Senate had no legislative constructs prepared for a Trump victory in January/February 2017; ♦and top off the cake of duplicity with the fact it was Republican controlled House and Senate committees who willingly opened ridiculous investigations against their own elected president claiming a ‘Vast Planetary Russian Collusion Conspiracy’.

In short, both Republicans and Democrats want the threat of Donald Trump removed.

There is no desire on the part of Paul Ryan/Kevin McCarthy or Mitch McConnell/John Cornyn to actually win seats in 2018. These GOP “leaders” would just as soon lose their majority position so they can go back to the comfortable indulgences of remaining in leadership in the minority status.

In the minority the leadership of the GOP are no longer threatened by President Trump and can hide behind the smokescreen of loyal opposition.

Substantively nothing changes, and the GOP leaders are just as well compensated in the minority by the lobbyist industry within DC.

The only threat to the financial interests of the GOP is President Donald Trump remaining in office and having to actually face carrying out a conservative Trump agenda in 2019 and 2020. That Trump agenda is entirely against their “establishment republican” interests.

The Paul Ryan mailer to elect a Democrat is just another example of how corrupt the entire UniParty political apparatus is within Washington DC.

That truism is entirely why this MAGA graphic, from 2015, remains accurate:

An accurate headline could also be: President Trump puts a beautiful potted plant into the unused meeting room of the National Economic Council, and Wall Street cheers.

According to media and White House confirmation President Trump has selected Larry Kudlow to chair the National Economic Council:

[…] “Larry Kudlow was offered, and accepted, the position of assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Director of the National Economic Council,” Sanders said. “We will work to have an orderly transition and will keep everyone posted on the timing of him officially assuming the role.” (link)

Kudlow is essentially adored by Wall Street (writ large), and as such all the nervous nellies will be back-slapping and high-fiving. As the stock market crowd cheers, what the insufferable dolts miss, thankfully miss and don’t appreciate, is the strategy of a master economic predator, Donald Trump. This Trumpian move is brilliant.

First, President Trump is immovable on his trade and economic agenda. Period; end of story. Ask Gary Cohn or any other member of the disassembled manufacturing council advisory board who quit last year because POTUS Trump just wouldn’t heed their duplicitous and high-minded advice. Do you remember candidate Trump mentioning the endless talking to nowhere that he has not time for? Yeah, that.

President Trump has a 30-year-developed plan and strategy for the U.S. to recapture economic power. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, and key trade strategist Peter Navarro are carrying out that plan.

Cohn or Kudlow thinking they would somehow disrupt three decades of trade planning by POTUS Trump is too funny to give typeset space.

Secondly, Larry Kudlow has a well known history of drug addition and drug abuse. He will likely never pass the background security clearances. Even Maggie Haberman at the New York Times recognizes this issue.

So what gives? Why would Trump select him?

Again, don’t think about this appointment as an actual intent to ingest a trade policy perspective. That’s nonsense. Oh, he’ll listen; Trump’s a good listener. But what POTUS is doing is giving the Wall Street crowd the appearance of influence; key word “appearance”. It’s a stock market appointment, nothing more. Nothing will change the intent of Trump to deliver on his already-in-the-works economic plan.

POTUS would cut off his own hand before he would change direction on his economic strategy. Remember: “America First”. Titan-minded Trump is the most committed economic influence agent in the history of American politics.

The National Economic Council (NEC) is an entity demanded by the traditions of the Office of the President. They assemble, meet, discuss, hold conferences, invite guests etc. However, for POTUS Trump it’s an exercise in formality run by professionals who benefit from the indulgences of membership.

The NEC has no more influence on Trump’s economic plan than any chosen Country Club has influence over his skills on the golf course.

The Senate voted 67-31 to end debate on a reform bill to modify the Dodd Frank banking bill. While overall the approach is needed and will likely find White House support, the Senate Bill -as constructed- doesn’t do enough to modify the control held by massive multinational financial institutions, who hold lobbying power over congress. Unfortunately, the corruptocrat leadership in the Senate will not allow the house to modify the bill as needed.

The current reform bill sets the tiered definition for lowered regulation at $250 billion in assets and there are some domestic banking beneficiaries. However, it doesn’t break up the investment division from influence over the commercial banking. The argument against breaking up the system is that if divisional separation is required – the banks best interests would naturally put the investment division ahead of commercial lending and the liquid capital within the overall economy would shrink.

The Trump/Mnuchin approach toward a secondary deregulated but financially sound banking system focused on commercial lending and was constructed around Community Banks and Credit Unions with far less regulatory and compliance hurdles.

WASHINGTON – All Republicans and more than a dozen Democrats voted to move the bill toward a vote on final passage, which is scheduled for Wednesday evening.

The bill, long expected to pass the Senate, faces an uncertain future in the House, where conservatives are demanding stronger curbs to Dodd-Frank before pledging their support.

[…] Banks with less than $250 billion in global assets would no longer be subject to yearly Fed stress tests or higher capital requirements meant to ensure risky firms could weather a lending crisis. Those banks would also be exempt from submitting for Fed approval a “living will” that outlines how the company could be liquidated upon failure without causing a widespread meltdown.

The threshold for tighter Fed regulation is currently set at $50 billion, and the increase would free several major regional banks, including SunTrust, BB&T, Citizens, Fifth Third, M&T and BMO Financial Corp., from those standards. Those banks all have at least $100 billion in assets, and among the bill’s biggest beneficiaries.

The bill also exempts banks that extend 500 or fewer mortgages a year from reporting some home loan data to federal regulators and broadens the definition of qualified mortgages. (read more)

Back in July 2010 when Dodd-Frank banking regulation was passed into law, there were approximately 12 to 17 banks who fell under the definition of “too big to fail”.

Meaning 12 to 17 financial institutions could individually negatively impact the economy, and were going to force another TARP-type bailout if they failed in the future. Dodd-Frank regulations were supposed to ensure financial security, and the elimination of risk via taxpayer bailouts, by placing mandatory minimums on how much secure capital was required to be held in order to operate “a bank”.

One large downside to Dodd-Frank was that in order to hold the required capital, all banks decreased lending to shore-up their liquid holdings and meet the regulatory minimums.

Without the ability to borrow funds, small businesses have a hard time raising money to create business. Growth in the larger economy is hampered by the absence of capital.

Another downstream effect of banks needing to increase their liquid holdings was exponentially worse. Less liquid large banks needed to purchase and absorb the financial assets of more liquid large banks in order to meet the regulatory requirements.

The four to six big banks (JP Morgan-Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, US BanCorp and Mellon) now control $9+ trillion (that’s “TRILLION). Their size is so enormous this small group now controls most of the U.S. financial market.

Because they control so much of the financial market, instituting a Glass-Steagal firewall between commercial and investment divisions (in addition to the Dodd-Frank liquid holding requirements), would mean the capability of small and mid-size businesses to get the loans needed to expand or even keep their operations running would stop.

That’s the underlying problem for a Glass-Steagall type of regulation now. The Democrats created Dodd-Frank which: #1 generated constraints on the economy (less lending), #2 made fewer banking options available (banks merged), #3 made top banks even bigger.

This problem is why President Trump and Secretary Mnuchin were working on a proposal to create a parallel banking system of community and credit union banks that are entirely external to Dodd Frank regulations and could act as the primary commercial banks for small to mid-sized businesses.

The goal of “Glass Steagal”, ie. Commercial division -vs- Investment division, would be created by generating an entirely new system of banks under different regulation. The currently remaining ten U.S. “big banks” operate as “investment division banks” per se’, and the lesser regulated community banks/credit unions operate as would be the “Commercial Side”.

Instead of fire-walling an individual bank internally within its organization, the Trump/Mnuchin plan was presented to fire-wall the banking ‘system’ within the U.S. internally. Hope that makes sense.

The Senate Dodd Frank reform bill does little to change this structural issue.

Justin from Canada discusses his confidence at defeating U.S. President Donald Trump over concessions in NAFTA. Essentially Sparkle Socks argument comes down to his view that women’s rights, climate change and globally progressive policies are more than enough to swat away the territorial annoyances of President Trump.